From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753425Ab3HDOk5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 4 Aug 2013 10:40:57 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56529 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753052Ab3HDOkz (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 4 Aug 2013 10:40:55 -0400
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 16:35:27 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Zach Levis <zml@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@ioremap.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] exec: introduce exec_binprm() for "depth == 0" code
Message-ID: <20130804143527.GA18906@redhat.com>
References: <20130801190455.GA3194@redhat.com> <20130801190511.GA3213@redhat.com> <CAGXu5jK+8xKW3Hbzg7g7o2c3G4aWrT4Y4UBCBmaM74cUPMYnQA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jK+8xKW3Hbzg7g7o2c3G4aWrT4Y4UBCBmaM74cUPMYnQA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 08/03, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > +static int exec_binprm(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
> > +{
> > +       pid_t old_pid, old_vpid;
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       /* Need to fetch pid before load_binary changes it */
> > +       old_pid = current->pid;
> > +       rcu_read_lock();
> > +       old_vpid = task_pid_nr_ns(current, task_active_pid_ns(current->parent));
> > +       rcu_read_unlock();
> > +
> > +       ret = search_binary_handler(bprm);
> > +       if (ret >= 0) {
> > +               trace_sched_process_exec(current, old_pid, bprm);
> > +               ptrace_event(PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC, old_vpid);
> > +               current->did_exec = 1;
> > +       }
>
> Cleanup looks good. One idea here, though: this could be made more
> pretty by doing:
>
> if (ret < 0)
>     return ret;
>
> to avoid the indentation for the "expected" code path.

Well, I do not reallt mind. But this "if" block is simple and small,
we do we need another "return" ?

To me the code looks more readable this way, but I can redo/resend.

Oleg.